[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: On DSLs
Re: On DSLs
Tue, 03 Dec 2019 11:26:29 +0100
>> For better illustration, I'll try to rewrite my own manifests in the
>> way I'd like to be able to write them. That's probably more useful
>> than theory (a tough statement to make for a theoretician ;-)
Just to be clear: I actually intend to implement some infrastructure to
make this happen, so this will take a while. One of my convictions after
decades in computational science is that ideas without implementations
should not be discussed extensively, so I try to live by my own
> That’s not true. In some cases, people write something that’s actually
> code (in YAML, in JSON, etc.) and there’s an interpreter running it.
I have been fortunate enough not to have seen such things yet!
> IOW, I think you can have a declarative _style_ in a full-blown
> language, like:
Definitely, and that's what I am aiming for. There remains the security
issue of malevolent power users sneaking in innocuous-looking
non-declarative code that non-expert users might run without suspicion.
But I'd say we can make a lot of progress by having declarative style
for all routine configuration data.
> This is just to say that we should not conflate the style and the
> language. I think what we care about is supporting a declarative style,
> and making it expressive enough that people don’t feel the need to
> resort to complicated code.
- Re: On DSLs,
Konrad Hinsen <=